Jump to content

Engine breaking after 30 seconds max power.


Gunfreak

Recommended Posts

4dcsk13.png

Any one tried WEP climb at 165 mph in P-51 in DCS, i think engine would blow up at those speeds.

It is impossible to prove how fast engine will die when coolant temp or oil temp being exceeded it is 100% up to ED, but at least we can prove that plane is just fine at 165 mph under full load.


Edited by grafspee

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, grafspee said:

4dcsk13.png

Any one tried WEP climb at 165 mph in P-51 in DCS, i think engine would blow up at those speeds.

It is impossible to prove how fast engine will die when coolant temp or oil temp being exceeded it is 100% up to ED, but at least we can prove that plane is just fine at 165 mph under full load.

 

I think you probably meant to say 141.5 mph (**corrected). It's an interesting chart, and I really enjoy the insight it offers on how altitude affects performance/fuel consumption.

But there is something I have been wondering about and wanting to throw out there for awhile now. Could there be differences in the way a vintage WWII fighter would be maintained/cared for today as opposed to its war time maintenance? 

I might be wrong, but I am assuming that today's collectors would likely want to baby their vintage planes more than the plane would have been back in the day.

I honestly don't know how, or if this has had any influence on the model in DCS, but it does seem like the model is being limited toward safety. A good example of this would be the preflight de-leading procedure compared to the current run up limits being used today by collectors/owners.   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wartime maintenance was way more intense, mainly because those planes were used way more. But maintenance would not affect engine limitations, unless there is something done very wrong.

Modern P-51 most of the time uses modern fuel and engine is tweaked for this fuel, so de-leading procedure isn't used. But this does not mean that suddenly engine won't take that procedure and only proof of this is in manual because it is hard to find any one do this in multi million dollar hardware.


Edited by grafspee

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, grafspee said:

Wartime maintenance was way more intense, mainly because those planes were used way more. But maintenance would not affect engine limitations, unless there is something done very wrong.

Modern P-51 most of the time uses modern fuel and engine is tweaked for this fuel, so de-leading procedure isn't used. But this does not mean that suddenly engine won't take that procedure and only proof of this is in manual because it is hard to find any one do this in multi million dollar hardware.

 

I think you may have missed my point, and maybe it was my use of the word "maintenance" that misled you. The point I was making was not about the intensity of maintenance, maybe I should have used the term "performance limitations" instead?

Also, the point is not whether the de-leading procedure is being done today, or even that it was being done in 1945. The point was that in order to do the de-leading procedure, it demanded that MP be held at 61 for 1 minute with the plane chocked. Current run up limits being used by current collectors/owners according to a post in another thread regarding this issue is 33. Does the DCS model attribute damage if we exceed a MP limit of 33 while parked?

So I'm just wondering if the way these vintage planes are being cared for today had any influence on the way things were modeled in the DCS Mustang? Did they use more conservative numbers to model this part of the Mustang? It would certainly fit the current situation, and might help explain why we seem to be seeing a more fragile engine then one might expect.

I think you are quite right though, if we were to hold the Mustang at 145 mph with a manifold pressure of 67, it would cook the engine well before 28 minutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Callsign112 said:

I think you may have missed my point, and maybe it was my use of the word "maintenance" that misled you. The point I was making was not about the intensity of maintenance, maybe I should have used the term "performance limitations" instead?

Also, the point is not whether the de-leading procedure is being done today, or even that it was being done in 1945. The point was that in order to do the de-leading procedure, it demanded that MP be held at 61 for 1 minute with the plane chocked. Current run up limits being used by current collectors/owners according to a post in another thread regarding this issue is 33. Does the DCS model attribute damage if we exceed a MP limit of 33 while parked?

So I'm just wondering if the way these vintage planes are being cared for today had any influence on the way things were modeled in the DCS Mustang? Did they use more conservative numbers to model this part of the Mustang? It would certainly fit the current situation, and might help explain why we seem to be seeing a more fragile engine then one might expect.

I think you are quite right though, if we were to hold the Mustang at 145 mph with a manifold pressure of 67, it would cook the engine well before 28 minutes.

This lower power run up is from P 51 manual, it consists reeving engine up to 2400 rpm and testing governor magnetos, most of procedures are used in modern examples as well. Probably you are right that dcs P 51 is based on modern examples, problem is that no one operate those planes at those power ranges, and this famous wep use certain death bug. 

Running today those birds is very expensive and founding is limited, lower power limits helps extend time between major repairs, back in WW2 this issue was a lot further on priority list.


Edited by grafspee

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, grafspee said:

...Running today those birds is very expensive and founding is limited, lower power limits helps extend time between major repairs, back in WW2 this issue was a lot further on priority list...

 

Absolutely and for sure anyone would be able to understand why you wouldn't be thrashing something like a P51-D around today. I was just pointing to this as a possible consideration in case its something that has been buried out of sight and out of mind by now.

ED most likely knows where they are on this anyways, and what ever it is, I am confident that when they do get back to the new cooler model, they will simply be making what is already currently the best P51 Mustang simulation even better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we will need to wait until they release the new cooling system, because right now enter a fight with an AI that always climbs and slow down, it is impossible.. so everytime waiting for them to go down while we fly horizontally. Another plane in the hangar. And then, there are other warbirds that it is incredible difficult to break the engine as the P47.


Edited by Japo32
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Japo32 said:

So we will need to wait until they release the new cooling system, because right now enter a fight with an AI that always climbs and slow down, it is impossible.. so everytime waiting for them to go down while we fly horizontally. Another plane in the hangar. And then, there are other warbirds that it is incredible difficult to break the engine as the P47.

 

I don't have much of problem to beat AI in P-51, once you keep this solid rule don't drop below 200 mph, P-51 is a great fighter. In P-47 your only concern is oil temp and carb air temp, but P-51 out class P-47 as a fighter by a lot.

After couple years of flying i learned couple things about DCS P-51 do not touch WEP and don't go below 200 mph and P-51 will perform.


Edited by grafspee

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing always freak me out from the simple AI FM is that its one and only tactics is friying your engine performing infinites vertical "Rope-a-Dope"'s where, 99.99% times our model with a complex FM-DM is going to die sooner than their simplier one. Unfare also highly frustrating once you've observed this same AI behavior in other models, jets or piston engine ones: in piston engines you're going to fry your engine and in jets you're going to finally overshoot him.

One thing you should always bear in mind once you go vertical is pulling fully back the throttle to idle few seconds before you reach the zenith (point of zero speed and stalling). Also is really good if you anticipate to the zenith and try to put nose down even before your radiator airflow stops or, even worse, goes backwards in your cooling system: you will notice this phenomenon when your nose goes down after the stall and a white smoke comes out your tail (water rad is fried and your engine is going to die in less than 30 secs due a piston breakage).  

You can do a dumb test hopping on in a Jet and dogfighting only with guns an AI 109 at an initial altittude of 30,000 feets. After that dumb test you will have another holistic point of view how things work in AI terms. 

A simple Human being's Passion

[YOUTUBE]

[/YOUTUBE]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Japo32 said:

So we will need to wait until they release the new cooling system, because right now enter a fight with an AI that always climbs and slow down, it is impossible.. so everytime waiting for them to go down while we fly horizontally. Another plane in the hangar. And then, there are other warbirds that it is incredible difficult to break the engine as the P47.

 

No need to wait for anything @Japo32. In some ways, I sort of regret bringing this up. I was really just trying to be helpful thanking that it might be so obvious that it is being overlooked. The only purpose to any of this IMO would be to help improve DCS. But again, it was just a suggestion and not being stated as fact. For all any of us here knows, the issues with engine management we are seeing may be related to something else entirely.

But I think if you follow the insights given in the last posts by grafspee and Old Crow, you can't go wrong. I second the notion to mentally lock your controls at continuous MAX settings and stay above 200. Once you have the continuous MAX thing and the number 200 burned into your memory, using short bursts of power to keep speed shouldn't be a big problem because your memory will force your hand to return the throttle where it should be even when you are frantically doing other things in the chase, or while being chased.

The only reason my P51 sits in the hangar is because I'm doing something else.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Callsign112 said:

second the notion to mentally lock your controls at continuous MAX settings and stay above 200

Max continuous which is 46" 2700rpm is not enough power for dog fight, i use military rating 61/3000 and i can go with that power +15min, only thing i watch is the speed.

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can cook the engine on MAX continuous. @Japo32 , complaint is he keeps over heating his engine and can't keep up with the Ai. My suggestion would be to learn how to fly the plane without cooking the engine first. I think one of the problems might be that people are jumping into the extreme end of the SIM too fast.

Dog fighting in any of the DCS WWII planes is flying them in the highest stress environment they can be put in.

I would also suggest learning to dog fight by using the ME to control the Ai at the start. Start with easy level patterns, and add more challenge at your own pace by playing with speed and elevation change. The point is you will know what to expect, and that should help you concentrate on how to handle the plane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...